Next Chapter

Typos — p. 393: Mac Auliffe [= MacAuliffe]; p. 396: inland, populations [= inland populations]; p. 400: overweaning [= overweening]; p. 410: Alan [= Allan]; p. 410: Woolstonecroft [= Wollstonecraft]; p. 419: 6 ins." [= 6 ins.]; p. 423: resistent [= resistant]; p. 423: Dryer [= Dreyer]; p. 424: height. 1 [= height. 3]; p. 424: stature. 2 [= stature. 4]; p. 426: [= ]; p. 430: discernable [= discernible]

- p. 385 -
Part III
Mainly Inferences from Parts I and II

- p. 387 -
Chapter I
The Desirable Mate (Male) 1

        Age. Balzac said that at 40 a man reaches the last year when he can contemplate marrying a young woman. 2 In England, 45 to 50 would be nearer the limit. Beyond that age there is, for the girl, not only the risk of encountering a certain unsavouriness in her mate (through declining functions, poor teeth, etc.), but also the danger of his prompt demise, through the strain of marriage with a young woman, not to mention his temper aggravated by jealousy. In a dialogue between Gautama and a deity, for instance, we find this passage: "The man who, past his youth, brings home a woman with breasts like the timbaru fruit, and for jealousy of her cannot sleep, that is the cause of loss to the losing man." 3
        Manu said that a man should marry at 24 to 30, 4 while the puranas said from 20 to 25. 5 Hesiod, the wise old poet of Bœotia, said 30 or thereabouts was the proper age for the Greeks, 6 and his later kinsmen, who were observant of Nature's laws, thought it highly improper for people of the same age to marry, "for the vigour of man endures much longer," 7 Aristotle thought that, as a man's body reaches perfection at 37, he should, at that age, marry a girl of 18. 8
        The Romans, essentially a military people, like the Spartans, encouraged, as the latter did, much earlier marriages. Their jurists set the age at puberty, i.e. 14 for the male and 12 for the female; but the ceremony was rarely celebrated before the assumption of the toga, which occurred at various ages from the 13th (Caracalla) to the 16th year (Cicero). 9 Subsequently, in

        1 The various aspects dealt with are arranged alphabetically to facilitate reference.
        3 The SUTTA-NIPATA (VI, v. 20).
        4 L.M., IX.
        5 Capt. A. Pillay (op. cit., S.R.C., p. 84).
        6 WORKS AND DAYS, 695–702.
        7 Euripides: TRAGICORUM GRÆCORUM FRAGMENTA (2nd Ed., A. Nauck, Leipzig, Frag. 24): "It is a bad thing to marry a young man to a young woman, for potency remains with the male for a longer time and the youth of a woman deserts her form more quickly."
        8 POLITICS, VII, xvi, 1335d.
        9 P.L.R., pp. 29 and 128–130.

- p. 388 -
the hope of purifying the morals of the people, Augustus legislated against unmarried men between 20 and 60, and unmarried women between 20 and 50, and against childlessness in men over 25 and in women over 20. 1 But this was late in Roman history.
        The Jews, as we have seen, also encouraged early marriages. Although the MIDRASH set the man's age at from 30 to 40, the MISHNAH says 18, and we know that the old Talmudic sages thought it hardly possible for a man to be anything but vicious or psychopathological if he were unmarried at 20. 2 In the east of Europe, to this day, marriages of Jewish boys of 15 or 16 are not at all rare. 3
        In ancient Peru men had to marry at 24, 4 while in mediæval and sixteenth and seventeenth-century England the age was much lower. Fourteen for boys was quite common; often they married earlier, although they did not necessarily consummate the marriage before 14. Thus Maurice, the third Lord Berkeley, born in 1281, was married in 1289 to Eve, daughter of Ewdo, Lord Zouche, "and was by her made father of Thomas, his eldest son, before he was 14 years old himself. Neither was his wife above that age".
        Maurice, the fourth Lord Berkeley, was married in 1338 to Elizabeth, daughter of Hugh, Lord Spencer, then 8. But he had no issue from her till twelve years later. William Essex, aged 10, was married in 1487 to Elizabeth Roper, aged 11. 5
        And these were not isolated cases. Such marriages were taking place all over the kingdom and in Scotland as well; but the practice, though defended by learned jurists, 6 was rooted in laws and customs which have now lapsed, and must be regarded as exceptional, at least as far as the male is concerned.
        The German Civil Code lays down 21 years as the marriage age for men, 7 and in England we now regard this age as about the minimum desirable age at which a man can marry.
        What conclusions are to be drawn from the above conflicting data?
        In the first place, while it is well to bear in mind that the Greek idea of the unnaturalness of marriages between couples of the same age is very sound, and that a girl is, as a rule, much

        1 Ibid., p. 75
        2 See Note 3, p. 32.
        3 Van der Horst (op. cit., p. 32).
        4 Garcilasso de la Vega (op. cit., I, p. 350).
        5 C.M.D.R., pp. XXVII, XXVIII and XXXIII.
        6 See defence by Judge Swinburne (1560–1624), Ibid., p. xliii.
        7 M.A.R., p. 493.

- p. 389 -
happier with a man considerably her senior and can more easily make him happy, we cannot now unfortunately carry this practice to the lengths advocated by Aristotle, because in modern civilization there are not the sound institutions which in ancient Greece enabled a man to remain safely unmarried and yet sexually satisfied until well on in the thirties.
        It is, of course, undeniable that a sound girl's sexual instinct, as also her desire to reverence where she loves, both direct her to her senior. As Shakespeare so wisely says:—

        "Let still the woman take
        An elder than herself; so wears she to him,
        So sways she level on her husband's heart;
        For women are as roses, whose fair flower
        Being once displayed, doth fall that very hour." 1

        There are cogent reasons for this. In the first place, the girl of from 15 to 18 is normally so much senior both physically and mentally to a youth of her own age that she cannot associate with him and feel that support, that strength and that vigour, intellectual and physical, which her instincts need.
        Secondly, the youth of her own age, who has the requisite relative seniority is so rare and such an oddity as to be usually undesirable.
        Thirdly, women age so much more quickly than men, that a marked disparity of age at marriage, even if it amounts to fifteen years, is much more normal than the majority of people, in England at least, suppose.
        It is extraordinary that the nubile Anglo-Saxon girl will not see this, more particularly as her unwillingness to do so is purely intellectual and acquired from the false values that surround her. This is more especially so in the working classes, where an absurd superstition — it cannot be given a more dignified name — against any disparity of more than two or three years, has somehow acquired so strong a hold upon the female, that a man even ten years a girl's senior is classed as "too old". If only people understood how much more easily happiness and fidelity are secured for both parties to a match by a minimum of ten years' seniority in the man, the perplexity now prevailing in regard to the increasing domestic disharmony in Anglo-Saxon countries would be dispelled, and a wiser practice would be adopted.

        1 TWELFTH NIGHT, II, 4.
        2 See for partial confirmation F.I.L.T. p. 49, Table XI. Among the unhappily married there were only 8, and among the happily married as many as 14 whose

- p. 390 -
        The celebrated eugenist, Dr. Fritz Lenz, allowing for the modern European circumstances mentioned above, says a husband should be senior by at least five to ten years. He deplores the marriage of people of the same age, which he maintains is promoted by the comparatively recent University life of both sexes in Europe and America, and yet he sees, as I do, the damage to body and soul that may overtake a man who, in modern condition, continently waits too long for marriage. 1 Dr. August Forel says: "The husband should be older than the wife, on the average from six to twelve years. This point is very important ifs monogamous union is to be lasting." 2
        Three contributors to the symposium on WHOM SHALL I MARRY? advocate from five or six to ten years' seniority in the husband, 3 and Dr. Van de Velde, the celebrated authority on marriage, recommends five to seven years. 4
        This point of view, moderate as it is, seems unassailable, and although I incline to Aristotle and am convinced that the majority of women would be much happier if the disparity he advocates were observed, I see the folly of insisting on it in Europe, and above all in England to-day. For, as things are, the average unmarried man of 35 or more, can, as Dr. Lenz points out, hardly fail to be objectionable in some respect, from the standpoint of a healthy girl of 15 to 18.
        Such men, says Dr. Lenz; "largely consist either of confirmed bachelors, sufferers or ex-sufferers from some venereal disease, psychopaths [if they have been chaste], people of weak passions, homosexuals, or else divorcees, who are to be taken with caution." 5
        No wise girl to-day, therefore, should accept a bachelor of 35 or over too readily. If he has had sexual experience, she should make sure of his soundness, and if he has had none, she should always ask herself these practical questions: "What has he done all these years? Has he repressed his passions and is he therefore a neurotic? Has he expressed his passion auto-erotically and

husbands were over 10 years older than their wives. Among the unhappily married there were 14, and among the happily married 2, whose wives were over three years older than their husbands. And of 5 couples in which both partners were under 21 at marriage, 4 were unhappy, i.e. 80 per cent.
        1 M.A.I., pp. 496 and 497.
        2 THE SEXUAL QUESTION (London, 1908, p. 428).
        3 W.S.H., pp. 51, 93, 96.
        4 I.M., p. 275. Keyserling also favours seniority in husband and suggests thirty as a good age for marriage in the male. (B.M., p. 33.)
        5 M.A.R., p. 494.

- p. 391 -
developed a narcissistic, probably guilty and, therefore, semi-repressed attitude to sex? Or has he had no passions, or hopelessly weak ones, in which case he is merely impotent or almost so?"
        There is a fourth alternative — as a man of passion he may have sublimated his sexual impulses by an overpowering and absorbing interest other than sex (religion, art, horse-riding, science, athleticism, frantically pursued), and thus diverted his energy into other channels. But in that case, the years of waiting will, according to the intensity of his sublimation, have left his sexual potency more or less impaired.
        If, being passionate, he has expressed his sex in normal heterosexual intercourse, he is a better man for marriage than the man of no sex experience, but he may have contracted some disease which, although cured, has marred his pristine purity.
        The two most common venereal diseases are gonorrhœa and syphilis. Although the former may appear to have been cured, it is insidious in the sense that "the germs of the disease may lie in some concealed part of the organism and continue to nourish there without their host being in the least aware of their presence." 1 No marriage should, therefore, be consummated With a confessed sufferer from this disease before consulting a competent medical man, as it is a well-known cause of sterility. 2
        Syphilis, which is not so common as gonorrhœa, can be wholly cured, and it may be regarded as being so when, the infection having occurred three years back, no symptoms have appeared (after adequate treatment) for a period of eighteen months, and repeated blood-tests, have given negative results. But, even so, a doctor should be consulted before marriage. 3
        Thus the most acceptable man of 35 or over is really the widower, but as all eligible men are not widowers, 4 and marriage is an urgent need for the healthy young woman, she must, as a rule, content herself with a younger man, and not aim deliberately at one who is her senior by over ten years.

        1 DIE GATTENNWAHL, by Dr. Max Hirsch (Leipzig, 1922, p. 6).
        2 B.M.J., 13.10.28, p. 653. Kenneth Walker, F.R.C.S., says: gonorrhœa "as a cause of sterility is widely recognized". According to Drs. C. Mayer and L. Hoffmann, the male: is indirectly responsible for most of the infections resulting in female sterility. (B.M.J., 9.3.29).
        3 Max Hirsch (op. cit., p. 8).
        4 Widowers may have children, and as the decent, passionate woman cannot be a good step-mother (only women of tepid passions can be that), a girl should not be too eager to enter a situation which may make her incur the reproach of a stupid, romantic world, even if she is sensible enough not to reproach herself for disliking

- p. 392 -
        This would mean that to-day a girl of 15 to 18 must look to a man from about 25 to 28 as her best mate. And, from my very intimate knowledge of the modern young Englishman, I can assure such a young woman that her risk of encountering a man of this age with a history of cured venereal disease is much more remote than that of finding a mate who is either a psychopath, an auto-erotic, or alas! merely a passionless saint.
        Three experienced American judges have expressed the view that there is "more chance of successful marriage if both the principals are young." 1 I think this is true. But "young" does not mean the same in terms of years for man and women. If a girl of 14 or 15 marries a man of 25, both are young, the two are ideally matched, and the marriage is likely to be a very happy one. But the word "young" obviously means something different in each case.
        Unfortunately, there are in Anglo-Saxon communities so much ignorance about the realities of sex and marriage, and as much malicious prejudice against the early marriage of girls, that nowadays, as a rule, we stray very far from the ideal disparities, and even regard with equanimity the monstrous practice of marrying young men to their seniors in years, which is about as insane as anything modern can be. 2 But there are signs of a change in this direction, and one of the principal contributions to it, against the unconscious jealousy and manichæism of Anglo-Saxon matrons and old maids, and Anglo-Saxon fathers of daughters who constantly agitate for the sage of consent to be increased, is, it may be hoped, the corresponding section to this one in my chapter on the Desirable Mate (Female). 3

her husband's progeny of another bed. For an explanation of this for people to whom it is not obvious, see W.V., pp. 312–313.
        1 M.M., p. 51. Dr. V. C. Pedersen (op. cit., p. 187) says: 20 in women and 22 in men is the latest age for marriage. This is right, except for the man.
        2 In the Registrar-General's Statistical Review for 1928 for instance, we find that 21 women of 30 married youths of 20; one woman of 30 married a youth of 17; while another of 38 married a youth of 19. Two women, 40 and 41, respectively, married youths of 20; and 17 women between 40 and 51 married men of 22. A few women between 57 and 69 married men of between 24 and 34, and women of 70 and upwards married men of 35, 37, 40, 44, 48, and 50. It is noticeable that the British matron and the meddlesome Anglo-Saxon spinster, whose principal motive to interfere is always sex-jealousy, make no fuss about these monstrous cases, because they know that much sexual joy cannot be got out of them. And yet, unless a youth suffers from a graophile complex (a morbid love of senile females) nothing can excuse such a large number of misalliances in one year.
        3 This section on age should not be considered without a study of the corresponding section in the next chapter.

- p. 393 -
        Body-Build. Four or five authorities on this subject, apart from Kretschmer, have now to be mentioned and conclusions drawn.
        Mac Auliffe, condensing the results of his predecessors in this field, distinguishes four desirable types (Fig. VII):—
        (1) The Muscular, e.g. the Canon of Polycleitus and the Apollo Belvedere.
        (2) The Respiratory, e.g., the Borghese Gladiator, the Venus of Arles, Michel-Angelo's David, the boxer Carpentier, and the runner Kolehmainen.
        (3) The Digestive, e.g., the Venus of Cnidus.
        (4) The Cerebral, e.g., Cæsar, the Emperor Claudius, Goethe, Victor Hugo, and Pasteur. 1

        These are all healthy and desirable and should not be assimilated too closely to Kretschmer's types, without qualification.
        The first is described as "a resilient (springy), elegant type, of 7 heads to the body", whose lowest ribs should be at a distance of two fingers' width from the point of the hip, whose face is equally wide throughout and whose trunk is evenly proportioned.
        The second is broader-shouldered and taller than the former, the xiphoid angle 2 is more acute and the muscles more attenuated.

        1 T., pp. 46, 50, 51, 58, 63, 66–78. The diagram is after MacAuliffe.
        2 The xiphoid angle, or costal arch, is the angle formed by the lower and the a-sternal ribs and the sternum.

- p. 394 -
Only one finger's width separates the lowest ribs from the point of the hip, the middle segment of the face is the broadest, and the thorax dominates the trunk.
        These two, says MacAuliffe, "are the leading types of humanity", and in them the preponderance of one feature does not imply the amorphousness of any other.
        The third type is "free from hollows and humps" (i.e. sleek). In the female "the hips are broad, high, the shoulders narrow, and the thorax squat. . . . The jaws are firm and the lips everted." . . . The modelling of the body is softened by the adipose covering; the lower segment of the face is widest, and the abdomen dominates the thorax.
        In the male ample curves reveal no corners or bumps. Sleekness with suppleness is typical. The form is attractive and harmonious throughout.
        Neither male nor female of this third type is pyknic.
        The fourth, which MacAuliffe says is very rare in Greek antiquity, is the type towards which "civilized mankind as a whole seems to be tending". The cranium dominates an orthognathous face of medium size. The body is harmoniously proportioned, and, in the finest examples, exhibits good muscular and visceral development.
        "No matter what may have been said to the contrary," says MacAuliffe, "great intellectual power is usually associated with a finely-built and well-modelled body."
        These four ideal types "are endowed with cellular structures which respond adequately to environment. Stasis is reduced to a minimum and they reveal the fewest deformities." They enjoy a maximum of resilience, and hardly change from adulthood to death. With sound instincts, they generally achieve superior adaptation, and their decline, which is but a progressive diminution of activity, usually culminates in a rapid end. 1
        In three other less-highly evolved types — the primitive, the regressive and the morphologically irregular types — in whom traits overcome in the first four reappear — MacAuliffe finds the criminals the constitutionally morbid, and mentally unstable.
        In the latter of these three groups are included equivalents to Kretschmer's schizoid-asthenic and cycloid-pyknic, which MacAuliffe calls the Flat and the Round type respectively.
        The first, a dehydrated (dry) type, is more elastic and economically organized. It is thin, active, sensitive, quicker in

        1 Ibid., pp. 38–99.

- p. 395 -
movement and more nervous than the second, and usually sober. But it is irritable, easily falls ill (T.B. particularly), or breaks down, especially when ill-adapted, which it often is, and it frequently becomes a "down and out".
        The second is unelastic, hydrated (not a dry type), slow-moving, not very sensitive, corpulent, bulky, and accepts its relation to environment apathetically. MacAuliffe places Balzac and Renan in this class.
        The ill-favoured of both types tend to be asocial and ill-adapted. 1
        Otherwise Kretschmer's description of the schizoid-asthenic and the cycloid-pyknic may be followed for these types respectively. But the alert leader will already have seen that they are but degenerates of the first group of four, and therefore that Kretschmer with his healthy schizothyme and cyclothyme, together with his morbid examples of each type, really covers all MacAuliffe's ground.
        Weidenreich finds two main types — the leptosomatic and the eurysomatic — whose characteristics he tabulates as follows:—

General Impression of Form
General State of Nutrition
Shoulders (breadth)
Chest circumference
Xiphoid angle


Head in general
Space between eyes
Palebral fissure

Long, narrow
Tall, slim

Inclining to thinness
Long and narrow
Long and slender
Long and thin
Long, narrow, flat
Always less in girth than chest
Midway between end of sternum and symphisis 3
Long and narrow
Long, oval (ellipse?)
Narrow, lofty
Prominent, long, narrow, straight or convex
Pointed, narrow
Short, broad
Short, squat

Inclining to fatness
Short and broad
Short and stout
Short and thick
Straight and raised high
Short, broad, deep
Also, but difference slighter

Below midway between these points
Short and broad
Circular (full moon)
Broad, low
More like a slit
Flat, short, broad, straight or concave
Round and broad

        1 Ibid., 131–197.
        2 R.U.K., p. 48. This is but an extract of the complete table.
        3 This is the "symphysis pubis", or pubic arch, the small bone joint in the front of the pelvis.

- p. 396 -
        He demonstrates very cogently that these two types run through all the races of mankind, and are not, as has been asserted, rooted in race, although one race may incline more to one than the other.
        He finds MacAuliffe's Cerebral in both the leptosomes and the eurysomes, and suggests Schopenhauer and Hebbel as examples. We may see Kretschmer's schizoid-asthenic and cycloid-pyknic in Weidenreich's types, provided that we remember that they cover all the healthy and unhealthy of each class.
        Weidenreich claims that urban conditions favour leptosomes and rural eurysomes, and he believes, as Lubinski does, that this is due to muscular work shortening the stature. He thinks a person's type may change during lifetime; and, following Stockard argues that seaboard are more leptosomatic than inland, populations, owing to the iodine in the sea stimulating the thyroid gland, which has "the most important influence on growth".
        Women, he thinks, tend to be more pyknic or eurysomatic than men. 1
        Stockard calls the two types linear and lateral; he thinks they are distributed through the different races, and defines them as hyper- and hypothyroid respectively.
        "The linear type," he says, "is faster growing, high metabolizing and thin, but not necessarily tall. The lateral type is slower in maturing and is stocky and rounder in form." 2
        Weidenreich's description of his leptosome follows Stockard's linear type fairly closely, except that in the latter "the lower jaw is small and narrow, and usually not strongly developed. The teeth are, as a rule, crowded and somewhat ill-set . . . the shoulders are square and high and angular." Stockard adds: "Persons of the linear type are usually far-sighted, though not abnormally so. . . . Usually and particularly as children, they are underweight for their height. . . . They arrive at puberty early . . . and differentiate rapidly. . . . Their skin is thin and sensitive, so is also the epithelial lining of their digestive tract. . . . . They are, as a rule, active, energetic, and nervous, quite self-conscious, and thus constantly exerting considerable nervous control. 3 When in normal health, they rarely laugh loud, when

        1 Ibid., pp. 46, 64–169. Max Hirsch thinks women incline more to the asthenic type (Z.P.F, p. 15). But, as we saw in Chap. III, this is a modern and chiefly northern tendency, and should not be regarded as normal.
        2 P.B.P., pp. 279–285.
        3 See pp. 267, 315 and 316 supra.

- p. 397 -
suddenly shocked they resist the reflex jump, and they never scream. . . . On these accounts the linear type passes for cool and calm with steady nerve, while, as a matter of fact, the body is almost constantly held under nerve control and is actually nervous in the common sense." 1
        This is obviously Kretschmer's healthy schizothyme and Weidenreich's leptosome.
        Weidenreich's description of the eurysome also follows Stockard's "lateral" fairly closely, except that in the latter, we find, in addition, that "the teeth are not crowded and are usually smoothly set, the lower jaw is large and strongly developed . . . the shoulders are smooth and sloping . . . the eyeball is so shaped as to be near-sighted . . . this type is well rounded and overweight for its height . . ." and unlike the linear, fluctuates in weight. . . ." The type arrives at puberty a little later than the linear and is slower differentiating." 2
        "The initial reaction of the linear type," says Stockard, "to any suggestion is apt to be contrary or negative . . ." that "of the lateral type positive".
        The linear type is more adventurous, eats lean meat and generally high protein diet with little fat or sweet. The lateral type is more inclined for well-pondered plans, with a higher regard for details and preparedness. This type likes a high carbohydrate diet.
        "The two types are more clearly differentiated in men than in women," 3 and Stockard, like Weidenreich, says women are more lateral (pyknic, eurysome) than men. He thinks environment, i.e., the plus or minus of iodine over long periods determines the types, and the latter may change during life, though the young adult is the best example of each type. 4
        Dr. F. G. Crookshank, after reviewing the literature, produced a useful table of equivalents, of which the following is an extract:— 5

De Giovanni, 1877
Sigaud, 1908
Bryant, 1913
Stockard, 1923
Weidenreich, 1927


        1 P.B.P., pp. 285–287.
        2 Ibid., pp. 288–189.
        3 Ibid., p. 289.
        4 Ibid., pp. 289–293.
        5 Op. cit., pp. 458–459. This table is based on MacAuliffe's (T., p. 43): but I have modified it slightly.

- p. 398 -

Russian School




Don Quixote
Muscular and Respiratory



Myxœdema and dyspituitarism
Sancho Panza



        The careful reader, who has traced the common factors in the theories of types above, including Kretschmer's and Jung's, should have little difficulty in drawing the right conclusions. We are, alas! much accustomed to the abnormal to-day, and perverted enough to think it "interesting", that the normal of the above data and arguments may not be instantly apparent.
        If however, we allow what we have read to relate itself to all we have seen in the masterpieces of sculpture, in the best specimens of native races encountered abroad or studied in books of travel or ethnology, and in the finest examples of our own people, what are we forced to conclude?
        Let me put it in a sentence: That the desirable type of man is a healthy leptosome, with a frame sufficiently robust and well-clothed with muscle, and with a skin sufficiently tonic and well-nourished, to enable him to react without hyper-æsthesia, irritability, or undue haste, to environment, and yet sensitive and alert enough to enable him adequately to grasp his environment and master it. Not as heavy as an athlete or a professional heavyweight boxer, but naturally wiry and slim without being mercurial, his body gets out of any scrape, and wriggles through any crevice. This is the thoroughbred male, resilient, agile, powerful, recuperative, resourceful, fleet, fiery and essentially sane. Brave because he has confidence in his natural equipment, even-tempered because he is strong 1 and every pinprick is not a stab, constant because his character is stable, 2 objective and,

        1 See Balzac: LES PAYSANS, "Comme tous les êtres réellement forts, il avait l'humeur égale."
        2 See D.A., p. 9: "Plus un caractère est fort, moins il est sujet à l'inconstance."

- p. 399 -
therefore, unlikely to be a fanatic or a crank, because his soundly functioning organism is not constantly drawing his attention inwards, ardent because his health is exuberant, and kind because his self-confidence inclines him to protect, he is the norm of all ages and races. He has been produced and triumphed everywhere and easily won the admiration of rulers, artists, and women.
        Any tendency to overweight, or to asthenia, to adiposity, however slight, or to thinness, however faint, is a step towards the abnormal in body and mind, a sign that the ductless gland balance, or something else, is wrong; and when once the nature of the wrongness is determined, the facts given above should enable the reader to know what to expect from the wrongness she has detected.
        Dr. E. Miller, who appears to have covered the whole ground (except perhaps Weidenreich), reduces the problem of types also to the question of normality, and arrives at a conclusion with which, up to a point, I agree. He says: "The centre of gravity of our norm of human behaviour lies nearer to the cyclothymic reaction than it does to the schyzophrenic", and he maintains that the muscular type of MacAuliffe (the Canon of Polycleitus) has "many pyknic components". 1
        If this means that the schizothyme is always on the too thin side, and, therefore, inclined to be irascible, negative, fussy, over-sensitive, self-conscious, fanatical and possibly sadistic, and that, therefore, a dash of the pyknic is essential in every desirable normal man, I think this means very much the same as what I have said above, and it describes a type that has figured as the ideal of the best cultures. It is probably the type on which six thousand years ago Egyptian civilization was built, 2 and one which most of us instinctively conjure up when we think of a fine youth. The nearest approach to it in modern sculpture is, I believe, Rodin's L'AGE D'AIRAIN; but it appears again and again in ancient Egyptian drawings and sculptures. A woman left to her instincts will usually pick out such a man rather than the "strong man" of the ring, and the type is the favourite of the deeper psychologists.
        Gustav Frenssen, in one of his novels, describes certain essential features of the type in the character of Dieter Blank, emphasizing the fact that he gave the impression of being well-braced, and of walking, as it were, on springs. 3 But the finest

        1 T.M.B., pp. 31 and 98.
        2 The healthy Mediterranean type.
        3 OTTO BABENDIEK (Berlin, 1927, p. 940).

- p. 400 -
tribute to the type has been paid by Paul Bourget, as follows:—
        "Of those men who are lucky with girls, and whom I have studied physiologically, sometimes with envy . . . 80 per cent have always been wiry rather than sthenic, slim and supple rather than athletic. All of them had that temperamental core which harbours the vital force. They all ate and digested admirably. They also possessed that indefinable capacity of active adaptation which is dexterity, deftness and bodily skill; and almost all of them possessed some wholly physical talent — they either danced well, rode well, or shot well. . . . The attractions that mark the professional lover actually reside neither in the cut of his clothes not in the material of which they are made, but in a sort of animal grace or charm, which cannot be acquired, and which age cannot destroy." 1 And he mentions Lamartine as an example of the type.
        Character. This, as we have seen, goes with morphology to a great extent (see description of ideal type, pp. 398–399 supra), and in selecting type, character is necessarily selected too. It is above all, important to try to get away from the tawdry characteristics which the popular Press, hearsay, and shallow fiction exalt as chiefly desirable, i.e. "a sense of humour", so-called "unselfishness", and "sportiness", which, even if they were of value, are not necessarily manly; and to concentrate on those manly qualities which the Age neglects and even depreciates — will-power, consistency, leadership, resolution, good taste, discernment, self-control, a capacity for self-discipline rather than for fellow -discipline (the man who cannot discipline himself is more prone to exercise tyranny than the man who can), sound judgment (the prerequisite of justice), and ambition, free from overweaning aspirations.
        Do not he put off by a certain tendency to extravagance in the male. Unbecoming as it is in a woman, remember that it is really a counterpart of the male's essentially katabolic nature, and, as that profound psychologist, Marcel Proust, maintains, "is in itself the proof of a rich personality," 2 ("rich" here meaning richly endowed psycho-physically).
        Remember that a good deal of the degeneration of the modern

        1 P.A.M., p. 67–68. See also P.F.M., p. 51, where Heape describes the ideal male thus: "He should be lean and spare, clean-limbed and muscular, clear of brain, quick of action; and so, from boyhood, he should develop these qualities."
        2 LES PLAISIRS ET LES JOURS (Mondanité et Mélomanie de Bouvard Pécuchet). Meanness in a man is actually a suspicious sign, because it indicates the female anabolic tendency, which goes with a feminine morphology.

- p. 401 -
Anglo-Saxon male is due to the fact that, for generations, we have been content to class as "manly" the man who was brave in a military sense and proficient in sport, and to overlook other qualities more essential to the modern civilized male, which were frivolously taken for granted if he had a good sports or games record. The latter is not unimportant, because, as we have seen, success in sport and games depends to a great extent on good health. But it is a mistake to give it undue prominence. And as to bravery, although it is essential in a mate, it is such an elementary male quality, and found so far back in the evolutionary ladder, that to argue, as people have argued, that the bravery shown in the late war proved that modern man was not degenerate is to misunderstand the whole problem of degeneracy and progressive evolution. 1
        A good test is a man's relationship to his womenfolk and theirs to him. Do his sisters respect his judgment? Do they lean on him, or have they grown up in an atmosphere of contempt for the male? Does he sway them by his natural ascendancy or by wiles? Does he practise what he preaches, i.e. if he believes in male leadership, is there a single decent woman who has ever been known to follow him willingly and absolutely?
        Remember that, although a girl's self-esteem may be flattered by associating with a man whom she can turn and twist at will, she is happiest in the end with the man on whom she can rely and who has the personality described above. This, of course, involves intelligence. As things are, however, after two thousand years of the hot-house forcing of intellect, brains have become so plentiful and cheap that it is important to bear in mind that brains without character (like education without character) are worthless, and may even be a doubtful asset. Remember, too, that the best brains, as we have seen, are found in the healthy.
        Nowadays there is far too great a tendency to concentrate on unessential qualities, particularly in Anglo-Saxon countries,
        Dr. Pedersen quotes two questionnaires circulated in 1914 by one of the leading American women's journals. The first, to mothers, asked for a description of the ideal husband for their daughters, and 98 answers dealt with "attributes which were unessential". Two expressed the wish that the husband might be a good father.
        To another sent to 100 young women, 99 answers were returned, which "went into foolish details concerned with

        1 For a more detailed discussion of this important point, see M.A.I., Chap. VI.

- p. 402 -
entirely superficial elements". One only stated "that she desired her husband to agree with her about the essentials of bringing up children" 1
        On the other hand, the female readers of PHYSICAL CULTURE (U.S.A.) voted for the essential quality of a mate in the following proportions:—
        Health, 20 per cent; Finances, 19 per cent; Willingness to have children, 18 per cent; Looks, 11 per cent; Disposition, 8 per cent; Education, 8 per cent; Housekeeping, 7 per cent; Character, 6 per cent; Dress, 5 per cent.
        The girls of Brigham Young College, Utah, also voted as follows: Physical and Mental Strength, 99 per cent; Abstinence from Tobacco and Alcohol, 95 per cent; Moral Decency, 86 per cent; Good Education, 50 per cent; Finance as unessential, 72 per cent; Ambition, 33 per cent. 2
        Here and there these results are good, but on the whole show a lamentable tendency to overrate non-essentials.
        Finally, let it be understood that a good husband should be like a good wallpaper — something one can live with daily. Flashy, obvious qualities are, therefore, to be avoided in favour of the sterling though less immediately stimulating and dazzling qualities. (On this point, compare equivalent section in next chapter. For additional remarks on character see Chapter 11, Part II, Section 14.)
        Class. Same as self.
        Complexes. We have seen that, where there is health and, of course, beauty, complexes need not preoccupy us. As, however, complexes may lead to awkward or tiresome behaviour, without necessarily inducing neuroses or functional disorders, it may be well to observe the few following rules:—
        (a) Avoid a man with too deep-rooted a link to his mother, if it appears that this has become an obstacle to adaptation, or to a free and common-sense adult outlook on life. 3
        (b) Avoid a man who is very touchy or self-assertive or who insists on always being right. This may indicate deep-rooted feelings of inferiority, for which somebody, usually the wife, must ultimately pay. 4
        (c) Avoid a man who shows peculiar tastes, such as a love of

        1 Op. cit. p. 113.
        2 M.M., pp. 82–84.
        3 C. J. Jung (B.M., p. 354).
        4 For a fine description of a man with an inferiority complex see the "Brutal Man", by Theophrastus. (L.C., Character 15.)

- p. 403 -
displays of brutality, a love of horrors, a tendency to torment and tease everybody, including animals. A sadistic bent may be suspected.
        (d) Avoid a man who is overanxious about his person, uses scent, has his nails manicured, uses outlandish bath-salts, dresses too immaculately, and is always inaccessible, no matter how much you may try to penetrate his inmost being. Narcissism, or extreme self-love may be suspected, with all that this involves in subjectivity, introversion, stubbornness, inability to see another's point of view, etc.
        (e) Avoid a man who habitually asks what so-and-so said or thought about him. This denotes a lack of manly pride, a tendency to measure himself wholly according to his neighbour's estimate of him, and consequently indicates modesty, which is the inevitable accompaniment of vanity. The trait can be overlooked and need not mean undesirable qualities in a man, only if the person whose opinion is the object of his curiosity is his acknowledged superior and much depends upon it.
        The reason why we should reject a man who is too much concerned about his neighbour's opinion of him is that such a person, in order to uphold his self-esteem, which in his case depends on his fellow-man's attitude towards him, will constantly try to seduce the latter to a high opinion of him, even to the point of posing, romancing and lying. This is suspicious and denotes a regressive attitude, i.e. an infantile complex. The world has become so vulgar that it prefers to deal with this vain-modest person rather than with the proud man who is concerned chiefly with his own measure of himself and is careless of the opinion of others. But if the equation, vanity = modesty is kept constantly in mind, mistakes will hardly be possible.
        Deportment. How does the prospective mate sit? Does he droop, loll or sit huddled up in a chair? Or is he braced and straight when seated?
        Poise is revelatory, not only of the prospective mate's degree of self-discipline and self-control, but also of the tone of his muscles and general constitution, remember that those whose muscles are inadequate for a braced, erect pose, generally suffer from muscular weakness throughout, i.e. in their hearts, abdominal wall and viscera etc., so that muscular weakness may be the source of a whole series of disabilities which middle age will probably reveal.
        It: is not generally known, however, that bad poise and

- p. 404 -
habitual wrong posture have a potent influence on health even when the muscles are sound and strong. The mechanical features of the human organism make it, up to a point, resemble any other machine; and in this sense no misuse, no habitual faulty use, can possibly go unrequited. It is fatuous to suppose, for instance, that the habitual doubling up of the abdominal viscera, or the pressing of them out of place, can leave their functioning unaffected, It is also fatuous to suppose that the thoracic viscera can be habitually constricted without dire effect on the heart and the respiratory function.
        There is an ideal use of self, as I have shown, 1 and any departure from it must be paid for in the end.
        How then does the prospective mate stand or walk? Does he stoop? Has he a marked hollow in the small of his back? Can you see his shoulder blades poking like pinions into the backcloth of his jacket? Do his hands tremble? Is he generally too stiff? (Almost always a sign of sexual repression.) Does he always lift one shoulder above the other?
        These are all signs of faulty co-ordination and are abnormal.
        Does he show a tendency to throw up his chin (a practice which in time will throw all his normal adjustments out)? And does he walk with the air of one who holds a commission to inspect the eaves of houses? If he does this habitually, inferiority feelings may be suspected, for which the peculiar poise is a postural compensation. It is the poise of many owner-drivers of cars, in whom it may have been induced temporarily by the awkward angle at which seats are fixed, but in whom it is also often a compensatory poise in the Adlerian sense.
        Many people wrongly imagine that this poise is right and dignified, and they deliberately assume it, like the imitators of the "Gibson Girl" a generation ago, because they think it looks nice. Where it is assumed unconsciously, however, it is always a sign of inferiority feelings. But, whether deliberate or unconscious, it is equally injurious to the organism.
        Education. To be considered only in so far as it does not proclaim a difference of class.
        Erotic disposition. Balzac was too serious a psychologist to indulge in remarks about marital relations merely for the sake of being salacious, and when he said: "In marriage, the bed is everything," 2 he meant that in a world disastrously oblivious of

        2 P.M., p. 195.

- p. 405 -
such things, it is important to lay stress on the need of physical harmony between couples.
        Owing to the frantic flight from the body, promoted and abetted by Christian values, we have been too prone, particularly in Protestant and Puritanical countries, to neglect the physical side of marriage, or actually to vilify it. And yet, if we are realists, we know that nothing could be more important.
        The Romans and the Jews rightly took this matter so seriously that they had criteria for determining the normal development of adolescent at puberty. Dr. Rossbach tells us that the Romans were not consent with assuming that puberty had been reached, but actually checked their surmises by an inspection of all youths' bodies. 1 As to the Jews, the old Talmudic sages carefully enumerated the stigmata of impotence in the male, which might safeguard the bride from the misery of being united to a man unfit to be a husband.
        Among the: signs were:—
        (1) Absence of pubic hair at 20.
        (2) Absence of hair on the face.
        (3) Soft and smooth skin.
        (4) A soft, effeminate voice, etc. 2
        I have already enumerated many of the signs, but they can be summarized here. In addition to the Jewish data above, they are — a small head, undue length of the arms and lower limbs, or undue fatness, or cushions of fat over the hips, chest, and face, together with thin long lower limbs, possibly persistence of the thymus gland with. generally infantile appearance, and finally small and infantile genitalia. 3
        Nor is it important to determine only potency in the mate. A plus rather than a minus is the quality to seek:, because, as all young women ought to be told, fire is the essential prerequisite of happy and acceptable sexual relations. Nature herself points the way to this. Her lower creatures mate only during "rut", when desire is keenest, and in the cold-blooded fishes there is no such thing as a sexual embrace.
        In their examination of a thousand marriages, R. L. Dickinson and L. Bean found that "Even where there were no children,

        1 UNTERSUCHUNGEN ÜBER DIE RÖMISCHE EHE (Stuttgart, 1883, p. 455).
        2 TAL., Jabmuth, 80b. Some of the items are unprintable.
        3 A girl's father or brothers should be able to see a prospective mate stripped and to discover stigmata of impotence, which the girl cannot discover for herself. See Note 1, p. 191 supra.

- p. 406 -
complete unity in marriage depends on sexual unity," 1 and their findings are confirmed by every experienced medical man.
        "The physician knows," says Dr. Courtenay Beale, "that the cause of marital disharmony and divorce is almost invariably sexual discontent," and he adds: "Marriage, whatever else and however much more it may be, is essentially sex-union." 2
        "Nothing is more fatal to love," says Dr. Van de Velde, "than disappointment in sexual intercourse." 3
        "Unhappy marriages, which are so terribly frequent," says Dr. Bauer, "are usually due fundamentally to the lack of complete mutual sexual satisfaction." 4
        Such observations could be multiplied almost indefinitely.
        It is, therefore, urgently necessary to persuade young women not to listen, against the dictates of their instincts, to elders who warn them that So-and-so looks too fiery or too sensual, or too "material" (this is the favourite expression of the British matron, who often uses it out of jealousy). Let all grown girls remember that the fireless, top-heavy saint crucifies not only his own flesh, but also his wife's.
        Not merely the adequacy of a man's sexual attentions is important but also, and above all, their form. Much has been written about this, as if a prescribed technique of sexual intercourse could replace sound instinct, or supplement it when it was lacking! Thus, I wholly agree with Dr. Esther Harding, when she writes: "The art of love cannot be practised successfully if it is viewed only as a technique — the expression of love must be a genuine expression of an emotion which is actually felt." 5
        For what young women should remember is that, even when a man lacks previous knowledge and experience, the ardour alone of his passions will prove the best initiator and the most inexhaustible inspirer. And without that ardour a whole library of books on love-technique cannot avail.
        Another important point is that passion and vanity are mutually exclusive; therefore that a man of passion will, as a rule, forget himself and his self-esteem when he really loves. The vain man, however, always sets his self-esteem and the kind of figure he is cutting in a situation, before anything else. That is why vain

        1 T.M., p. 447.
        2 W.W., pp. 11 and 24. See also p. 36
        3 I.M., p. 270. See also S.H.I M., p. 269.
        4 W., p, 210. Also N.E., p. 116, where Bryk shows how the happiness of the negro marriage depends on adequate sexual relations, and how the negresses insist on adequate sexual congress.
        5 THE WAY OF ALL WOMEN (London, 1933, p. 162).

- p. 407 -
people may usually be classed as lacking in passion; for, if their sensibilities were ardent, considerations of self-esteem could not receive attention. This accounts for the majority of so-called "Don Juans". Their hunger for repeated successes with women is too often the outcome of an aching sense of inferiority (which makes them wish constantly to be reassured about their personal merit) for it to be too lightly inferred from their many affairs that they are moved by passion. 1
        Nor is it merely a question of happiness. Health is also concerned, and Dr. M. Porosz has found that a husband's weak passion and sexual neurasthenia brings many young women with apparent ovarian trouble into the consulting room, although they turn out to be quite normal and their disorder — oöphoralgia erotica — is entirely due to the sexual subparity of their mates. 2
        The frequency of this condition in otherwise perfectly charming young men, is one of the tragic features of modern life, at least in the middle classes of countries populated by Anglo-Saxon stocks; that is why grown girls should keep a sharp look-out for the external signs of coldness or inferior sensuality in their prospective mates, and, no matter how resolutely they have to resist them, prefer the young men who press for sexual intercourse, or at least for early marriage, and who apply all their energies to making themselves fit for the latter, before those who act as though next year, or Doomsday, would be soon enough.
        Also do not let them be deceived by the man who constantly emphasizes his desire to have children. This is neither normal nor necessarily indicative of sexual ardour. Let them remember that his natural preoccupation is to desire the girl he loves. Children, no matter how welcome they may be, are merely a by-product of this mutual desire of a young couple for each other. When a man appears very anxious to have children, as such, two things may be suspected:— 3
        (a) Deep-rooted inferiority feelings, which he is hoping to smother by this triumph of exhibiting the results of his potency to the world.

        1 Stendhal saw this. He says: "Le bonheur de don Juan n'est que de la vanité." And he adds: "Les horreurs viennent toujours d'une petite âme qui a besoin de se rassurer sur son propre mérite" (D.A., pp. 223–225).
        2 B.M.J., 25.12.26. We must also remember that sexual abnormality in the male is now an important factor in childlessness. Dr. Sidney Forsdike says: 25 per cent of childless marriages are due to the condition of the husband" (B.M.J., 13.10.28), and is confirmed by Drs. Mazer and Hoffmann (B.M.J., 9.3.29)
        3 Unless he is nearing decrepitude and owns important properties or titles, which he wishes to hand on to an heir of his blood.

- p. 408 -
        (b) Doubts concerning his potency or sexual ardour, which may be well-founded. And, since a man's self-esteem draws its strength very largely from his sense of the potency of his sexual organs, doubts concerning their potency may be the cause of his inferiority feelings, 1 and may induce him anxiously to desire children, if only to terminate his doubts.
        A desire for children in an unmarried man is, therefore, more frequently a suspicious than a reassuring symptom.
        Neither is the display of jealousy by any means necessarily a proof of ardent passions. So often is it misinterpreted in this way that it is important to warn young women against the error. The jealous man may be a creature of ardent passions; but jealousy may also be simply wounded self-esteem, and have no bearing whatsoever on erotic disposition or the degree of auction felt by the man displaying it. A vain man may, and often does, resent very bitterly being outclassed by another man, although his feelings for the girl in question may be comparatively cold. Such a man's jealousy is no proof of his affection, or of the depth of it. It is merely a proof that his self-esteem may be unusually sensitive. Thus Larochefoucauld said: "Il y a dans la jalousie plus d'amour-propre que d'amour." 2
        Face and Features. Choose a good-looking mate. As we have seen, good looks are a guarantee of general desirability, and accompany not only superior health but also superior intelligence. A portrait gallery of great men is, on the whole, a collection of good-looking faces, and, as Dr. Joseph Hands says: "Nearly all persons of genius, whether men or women, were and are handsome and well-proportioned." 3
        On the positive side, seek beauty, symmetry, bold, big, full features. A determined strong jaw and mouth become a man. Be glad of a modicum of fierceness in a man's face. Do not shun a man on that account. Failing this, accept sternness, but nothing less. Observe the males of the mammalia. None of them has a mild expression. Even the ram has a trace of fierceness. The smile, the sympathy, the look of adoration that come from a fierce mate face are infinitely sweeter than those that come from a mild or gentle male face. There is more sweetness in its owner too.

        1 Apparently, primitive man is also sensitive about his sexual potency, unless the instance Bryk gives of a negro committing suicide because he was impotent is an exception (N.E., p. 117).

- p. 409 -
Look, moreover, for a sign of sensuality, and above all composure and serenity.
        On the negative side, do not look twice at a man with any odd or exaggerated feature, such as eyes too deeply set, a chin too pointed or too prominent, a brow too retreating, a marked asymmetry of any kind. Do not accept a man who, in a girl's attire, would pass as a Madonna, whose lower jaw vanishes in his collar, or who has an anxious, haunted look.
        A healthy endocrine balance is seen in manifold ways. The skin should not be dry, or greasy. The eye should be bright, the hair naturally glossy. The expression should be alert, and the general impression one of resilience.
        Remember that a straight, steady look does not necessarily mean honesty, unless it is confirmed as such by other signs. Remember too that a bluff, hearty look is not necessarily incompatible with deceit and duplicity. Henry VIII was an example of this. 1
        Finance. It is important for happiness that poverty should not add to the difficulties of a state already bristling, as marriage is, with difficulties of its own. 2
        Gifts. All gifts should be welcome, except those that amount to genius or exceptional artistic ability. Otherwise the more gifted a husband is, and the more catholic his tastes and interests, the happier a wife is likely to be. Unfortunately, owing to the fact that for generations it has had to specialize, the male sex is to-day inclined to be more restricted in its tastes and sympathies than the female, which has only recently started specialization on a large scale for gain. Consequently the average young woman will often be startled, less by the extent of her husband's intelligence and ability in his own line, than by his ignorance, comparative denseness and lack of interest in matters outside it. Apart from sport (an almost universal secondary interest), she will often find him singularly limited. On this account, it is hardly possible nowadays to select a man who is too intelligent or too catholic in his tastes, and, for a full life, the more intelligent and catholic a man is, the better.
        Advising quite impartially, and purely from the standpoint of domestic felicity, there are two types of man a girl should not

        1 See Agnes Strickland's good remarks on his point (op. cit., II, p. 152).
        2 S.H.I.M., p. 161. "Poverty is dangerous to married happiness." But, if my point and Van de Velde's about poverty and its dangers is correct, it argues more enduring and deeper passions in the so-called "lower" than the so-called "upper" classes. For in the former, happy marriages often occur in spite of poverty.

- p. 410 -
marry geniuses and highly-endowed artists generally. With the first, misery is almost certain. With the second, whether they belong to the first group or not, a girl should know that she has a creature who, like herself, is fatally destined to be occupied with gestation and parturition and to make a fuss about it. An artist is constantly bringing forth spiritual young, whether in music, sculpture, painting, poetry, the drama, or what not. And, in this incessant sequence of spiritual gestation and parturition, the female partner's physical gestation and parturition are likely to be relegated to a second or third place.
        Moreover, artists are essentially eager for inspiration. Their muse often requires fresh stimulation. Again, in this, the female partner often has to accept a back seat. Madame François Millet, Madame Palissy, Mrs. Dickens, and the female associate of Whistler in his early days, and the lifelong companion of Rodin, could both have given eloquent accounts of these two kinds of trouble.
        But there is a strong temptation to marry artists, because their creativeness is based in ardent sensibilities and superior sexual endowments. And their appearance is usually stamped with this character only those girls who have soberly and carefully concluded that the interest of the life makes up for its shortcomings should embark upon matrimony with an artist. If they do, however, let them abandon all hope of being, with their children, the centre of gravity in their homes.; for that can never be.
        The case against geniuses is even more damaging.
        "As a rule," says Dr. Lenz, "to be the wife of a genius is certainly anything but a blessing," 1 and we are told that when the King of Sweden gave audience to the widow of a famous scientist and inquired sympathetically about her late husband, the lady replied: "Your Majesty, he was insufferable!" 2 This is typical. And I can think of at least three women, closely connected with my circle as a child and young man, who could have said the same.
        Moreover, the genius is, as a rule, incurably impecunious. Edgar Alan Poe, Fielding, Nietzsche, Leopardi, Van Gogh, Rodin and Whistler could not, even as mature men, have main-

        1 M.A.R., p. 473. See also Mary Woolstonecroft (op. cit., p. 85), who speaking of geniuses, says: "Minds of this rare species see things too much in masses, and seldom, if ever, have a good temper."
        2 G.M., p. 16.

- p. 411 -
tained a family, though the two latter might have been able to do so in middle age.
        We have only to think of the large number of geniuses who have remained unmarried, in order, to see that, on the whole, the genius is not only unsuited to marriage, but is also averse to it.
        I can think of thirty-five geniuses who were unmarried — Michelangelo, the three Carraccis, Newton, Locke, Leibnitz, Bayle, Hobbes, Hume, Beethoven, Sargent, Rodin, Balzac, Chatterton, Alfieri, Pascal, Pheidias, Gibbon, Adam Smith, Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Spencer, Pope, Plato, Van Gogh, Newman, Descartes, Galileo, Ariosto, Rabelais, Musset, Comte, and Spinoza. And of thirty-two who married, seventeen were unhappy. These were — Dante (this is doubtful), Milton, Addison, Cæsar, Dickens, Molière, Socrates, Byron, Bernard Palissy, Napoleon, Shakespeare, Euripides, Haydn, Holbein, Berlioz, Fielding, Lope de Vega, and Machiavelli.
        Of fifteen who may be said to have been happily married, Disraeli and Mahommed both married rich old women who supported them and with whom they can hardly be said to have led normal married lives; Goethe was married only ten years to a woman who was beneath him; Browning was married fifteen years to a poor delicate creature who disagreed with him on spiritualism, and during whose lifetime he produced by no means his best work, and only the remaining eleven — Darwin, Bach, Zola, Gainsborough, Corneille, Constable, Jenner, Pasteur, Lizst, and Millet, can be said to have led anything approaching tolerable married lives. Can Jenner, however, be classed among the geniuses?
        While intelligence and catholic tastes are conducive to a fuller life, the desirable mate, therefore should hardly be a genius or m exceptionally gifted artist. Or, to state the case moderately, a young woman, should not, if she can possibly help it, marry such a man.
        Hair. Everything authoritative has already been said on this matter. Remember that men who are too hairy, or whose face and pate hair invades the mask in unusual places, are to be avoided.
        Although much can be inferred from the quality and quantity of a man's beard, and, as a rule, ceteris paribus, a feeble growth of beard indicates a weak constitution, 1 so many important facial features are covered by a beard and, for the reasons stated in the

        1 B.D.M., p. 36. See also Kretschmer, p. 280 supra.

- p. 412 -
previous chapter, it is so desirable that the eye should be trained to appreciate masculinity without the too-obvious signs that lead to indolence of observation, that, on the whole, clean-shaving is to be preferred.
        Female prejudice against beards is certainly common. As early as Shakespeare, in England, women appear to have disliked them; 1 and most great civilizations have developed a taste for clean-shaving. A New Zealand proverb says: "The hairy man catches no wife," 2 and Darwin regarded men with very hairy limbs and body as examples of reversion to a former stage in human evolution. 3 On the other hand, a taste for beards has frequently prevailed. Eleanora of Guyenne, for instance, in the middle of the twelfth century, was so horrified by the sight of Louis le Jeune's constantly smooth, hairless chin, that finding her mockery of no avail in making her husband give up shaving, she divorced him and married our King Henry II. There were certainly many other reasons for the divorce, but that Louis' monk-like appearance was one of them is unquestionable. And thus the taste for beards in a virago led to the acquisition of many rich provinces by the Crown of England, and incidentally also to hundreds of years of war.
        It has, moreover, been said that whereas bearded Romans conquered the clean-shaven Greeks, bearded Goths vanquished a generation of clean-shaven Romans. This is true enough. But I have already entered sufficiently exhaustively into the reasons why, at urgent at least, clean-shaving is probably more desirable than the fashion of face-hair.
        The desirable mate should be anything but conspicuously hairy.
        Hands. Select a man with large rather than small hands, provided, that the size be not altogether disproportionate. A large hand becomes a man, and is also a better guarantee of character than a small one, which may also indicate hypo-pituitarism, particularly if the hand is conical as well. A well-formed hand is also important. 4
        The musculature of a man's body may also be inferred from his hand. Men with very thin, limp hands may usually be suspected of asthenia.

        2 W. Bölsche, LOVE LIFE IN NATURE (London, 1931, p. 791).
        3. D.O.M., pp. 601–602.
        4 Balzac saw in a well-formed hand high intelligence. See P.M., p. 247: "Il est à remarquer que les hommes à puissante intelligence ont presque tous eu de belles mains."

- p. 413 -
        For the rest everything has already been said.
        Head. There seems to be no doubt that the head of a normal man, even relative to stature, is larger than that of a normal woman. Whether the relation to stature is fair or not, does not concern me here, seeing that we are engaged in giving the reader signs that strike the eye, and proportions certainly do so. We are not concerned with the superiority or inferiority of either sex.
        Given two people of the same size, therefore, male and female, the male should normally have the larger head.
        I have already adduced recent impartial evidence of this. But Ales found it in his material nine years ago, 1 and various authors, including Havelock Ellis, who admits it extremely reluctantly, have found that a normal man's brain is absolutely larger than a woman's. 2
        If, however, we glance, no matter how cursorily, at the rest of the mammalia, even those of the orders which provide our domestic animals, we notice at once that normally the male always has the larger head, and that this is particularly noticeable where the two sexes, as in the cats and cattle, diner hardly at all in regard to stature.
        A larger head than the female's, relative to stature, is therefore a distinctly male characteristic, and men with small heads are to be avoided. They probably have female elements, or are actually eunuchoid.
        Health. Good health in the mate is a sine qua non. Do not listen to the glib platitudes about sickness and ill-health always being associated with superior intelligence. None of the parrots who repeat this cry have ever troubled to test its truth, and it is merely the latter-day plea of self-conscious degenerates. The statistics I have adduced in earlier chapters have shown a high correlation between good health and mental ability, and when we examine the lives of the great, we find this correlation abundantly demonstrated.
        Manners. These should be instinctive. Where they are acquired they are merely good behaviour and are usually less valuable, as indicating no basis in character equivalent to the feelings they represent, and a proneness to disappear when witnesses who are feared are out of the way. That is why it is important to distinguish good manners from acquired good behaviour. It is also important to distinguish that radiance or geniality which in a

        1 THE OLD AMERICANS, p. 196.
        2 M.W., pp. 103–104.

- p. 414 -
friend is the outcome of genuine feelings of pleasure at our coming upon the scene, and that radiance or geniality which is merely the outcome of his extreme satisfaction with himself and with the impression he imagines he is making. Many a vain man thus gets a reputation for great geniality, who is really nothing but a dandy always trying to look his best. And this points to an exceedingly interesting aspect of good manners, which is too often overlooked — the objectivity of a good-mannered, and the subjectivity of a bad-mannered person. This alone shows how inborn real good manners must be, and how impossible it is for a wholly subjective person (and this type increases yearly) to be good-mannered.
        The best men and women, therefore, show instinctive good manners, and do so as children.
        The desirable mate should, therefore, have native good manners.
        Muscular Development. The leptosome of the heyday of Egyptian civilization was not, as we can tell from the frescoes and other graphic representations of him, a heavily-built athlete. It is likely, in fact, that great recuperative power is incompatible with the loss of resilience which accompanies an unusual development of the muscular apparatus, and since Aristotle lived in the midst of a culture, and in an Age, notorious for its athleticism, and must, therefore, have been intimately acquainted with every aspect of the athlete's life, his condemnation of him as a mate ought in itself to weigh very heavily with us. 1 But Havelock Ellis, if not so emphatic, is also highly critical of the athlete's sexual powers, 2 although I can find no passage where he condemns, as such, the condition of a heavy and rigid encasement of the body by muscle. On the other hand, care should be taken not to go to the other extreme, and favour asthenic men, or men suffering from muscular atrophy; for it should be remembered that the condition of a man's visible and consciously controlled muscles are, to a great extent, indicative of the condition of his visceral and unconsciously controlled muscles, and, therefore,

        1 POLITICS, VII, 16 (trans. as before): "The temperament of the athlete is not suited to the life of a citizen, or to health, or to the procreation of children, any more than the valetudinarian or exhausted constitution, but one which is a mean between the two", i.e. the leptosome described as desirable under Bodily Build, the man of the ancient Egyptian world, in which gymnastics were forbidden.
        2 S.P.S., IV, p. 192. "Muscular strength is not necessarily correlated with sexual vigour, and in its extreme degrees appears to be more correlated with its absence."

- p. 415 -
that underdevelopment of the former may mean underdevelopment of the latter, with all its accompaniments in the form of chronic constipation, possibly heart trouble, and so on.
        Nationality. Same as self.
        Occupation. See Gifts. As a rule a woman is happiest with a man whose occupation takes him out of the home. Seeing each other every moment of the day is not conducive to harmony.
        In their able work Drs. G. Dreyer and G. F. Harrison suggest three classes of occupation differentiated in respect of the general health of those who pursue them:—
        Class A, where the best health is found: Army and Navy personnel, police force, athletes and active sportsmen, university students (playing games) . . . fire brigade, blacksmiths, and boilermakers."
        Class B, which is intermediate: "Professional classes (doctors, lawyers, etc.), business men, railwaymen, high-grade mechanics . . . clerks (upper class).
        Class C, where the lowest health is found: "Tailors, shopkeepers, shoemakers, printers, potters, clerks (lower class), painters. . . ." 1
        No discussion of the question of occupation would be complete without making some reference to the statistical works of Drs. L. C. Parkes and H. K. Kenwood, 2 Drs. G. M. Kober and W. C. Hanson, 3 Sir Thomas Oliver, 4 and Drs. E. L. Collis and Major Greenwood. 5
        In the first work an exceptionally high health record is ascribed to agricultural labourers, and (but for diseases of the respiratory system) 6 to miners, and (but for diseases of the circulatory system) 7 to wool and worsted operatives, and (but for phthisis) 8 to hosiery operatives. For the rest, however, we find cotton operatives above the average in phthisis and respiratory diseases, innkeepers and publicans much above the average in phthisis and diseases of the nervous, circulatory and respiratory systems; tailors, shoemakers, and printers much above the average in phthisis; and tin-miners, cutlers, and potters much above the

        1 A.P.F., pp. 17–18.
        2 (1) HYGIENE AND PUBLIC HEALTH (London, 1923).
        5 (5) THE HEALTH OF THE INDUSTRIAL WORKER (London, 1921).
        6 261 per mil., against 174 per mil. for general population.
        7 150 per mil., against 144 per mil. for general population.
        8 200 per mil., against 186 per mil. for general population.

- p. 416 -
average in phthisis and diseases of the circulatory and respiratory systems. 1
        Taking 1000 to represent the mobility of all males between 25 and 65 in England and Wales, the comparative figure for all occupied males was 953, and while it was 687 in agriculture, it reached 1248 in industrial districts. Clergymen were low at 553, farmers at 563, school teachers at 604, farm labourers at 632; but lawyers were comparatively high at 821, as were medical men at 966; and the following were very high: industrial labourers (1509), publicans (1642), costermongers (1652), and hotel servants (1725). 2
        In the second work mentioned, most of the above findings are confirmed. In the third work we are told that "of all occupations, that of the farmer is the healthiest. Close upon the farmer comes the clergyman." 3 And while, in the main, Sir Thomas's figures support those in the two previous works, we find in addition that file-makers, cutlers, potters and earthenware manufacturers suffer an exceptionally high death-rate from phthisis and diseases of the respiratory system, and that lead-workers are unusually liable to diseases of the respiratory and circulatory systems. 4
        Sir Thomas also records the following interesting fact, that "the mortality for occupied and unoccupied males . . . between 25 and 65 . . . are 953 and 2215 respectively" . . . i.e. an excess of the latter of 132 per cent. "Nearly two-thirds of the excessive mortality of unoccupied males as compared with occupied is due either to diseases of the nervous system or to phthisis." 5
        In the fifth work mentioned, the authors show the high incidence of phthisis, particularly between 25 and 45, in tailors and shoemakers, 6 and the marked difference in the incidence of the disease among urban and rural dwellers, the latter showing a far higher death-rate for both males and females. 7
        According to this work clergymen and not agriculturists head the list for longevity and general health, while cabinet-makers, tailors, printers, and bookbinders are at the bottom of the list and have remained so for 22 years. 8
        Interesting facts are also given about cancer. Thus the lowest death-rates from cancer are found "among occupations of the highest social status." 9

        1 (1) p. 671.
        2 Ibid., p. 678.
        3 (3) Ibid., p. 57.
        4 Ibid., p. 59.
        5 Ibid., p. 64.
        6 (5) Ibid., p. 62.
        7 Ibid., p. 131.
        8 Ibid., p. 135.
        9 Ibid., p. 170.

- p. 417 -
        Among the occupations with the lowest cancer mortality (reckoned per 100,000 of the population of England and Wales), we find: Grocers (76.5), farmers. (78.2), farm labourers (79.7). coalminers (82.4), gardeners and nurserymen (85.2), railway engine drivers and stokers (85. 3), coal merchants (85.7), clergymen (87.3), and school teachers (90.1).
        Among the occupations with the highest cancer mortality, similarly reckoned, are: Gas-works service (107.1), innkeepers (108.8), lawyers (111.8), fishermen (111.9), textile workers (112.6), tailors (112.9), brewers (166.6), seamen (170.5), and chimneysweeps (224.9). Of these eight occupations, all but the first and last have shown a marked increase in cancer since 1890. 1
        Moreover, townsfolk show a higher death-rate from cancer and a greater susceptibility to the disease than country folk, and their women a higher death-rate from cancer of the generative organs than rural women. On the other hand, probably owing to the greater exposure to sunlight, rural folk show a higher mortality from skin cancer. 2
        Figures from Germany more or less confirm the above, and do so abundantly in regard to the difference between urban and rural folk for skin cancer. 3
        Regarding an occupation with which, through a long family tradition, I happen to be exceptionally familiar — that of artist-painters — I may say that, according to my experience the people I have known (including my own father and grandfather) who have pursued this calling, have all enjoyed extraordinarily good health. In order to make sure, however, that my observations were statistically confirmed, I paid a visit to the Royal Academy in 1923, and there, thanks to the courtesy of the officials, was able to extract the following figures from their registers:—
        Of the 293 artists who were made Associates and Academicians since the foundation in 1768, and whose birthdays could be ascertained:—

8 died at 90 or over.
25 died between 85 and 89.
35 died between 80 and 84.
49 died between 76 and 79.
36 died between 70 and 75.
46 died between 65 and 69.
36 died between 60 and 64.
24 died between 55 and 59.
15 died between 50 and 54.
8 died between 45 and 49.
4 died between 40 and 44.
7 died between 35 and 39.

        1 Ibid.
        2 Ibid., p. 172. These particular figures relate to the U.S.A.
        3 Ibid.

- p. 418 -
And between 1770, the year of the first vacancy, and 1923 only 362 original elections occurred, an average of little over two per annum.
        This is not a bad record. Over 50 per cent lived to 70 and over, over two-thirds to 65 and over, and only a fifth failed to reach 60. It seems even to point to a further correlation between stamina and ability.
        In a very different vein, Bourget, whose findings, however, relate only to French conditions, composed a list of occupations differentiated according to the opportunities they offer for illicit intercourse. I have selected from his data only those items which may be thought to apply more or less to England.
        The proportion of professional men in various occupations who indulge in illicit intercourse is as follows:—

Artist-painters: 80 per cent. Journalists: 50 per cent.
Sculptors: 50        " Dramatists: 20        "
Musicians: 25        " Novelists: 15        "
Architects: 50        " Poets: 30        "
Actors: Melodrama, 20 per cent; Comedy, 60 per cent;
Farce, 99 per cent. 1

        In all of the above, the calling certainly tends to offer opportunities for illicit relations outside the home. But whether the percentage would be so high in England may be seriously doubted.
        Generally speaking, that girl is happiest who chooses a mate whose work, while taking him away from home, is of such a nature as to impose certain disciplines and restraints.
        Pigmentation. There are undoubtedly correlations between fairness and brunetness respectively and certain character and mental traits. These have been discussed. On the score of these correlations, however (except for the probable association of darkness with greater vitality and more ardent sensibilities), it would be arbitrary to claim either fairness or brunetness as essential in the desirable mate. It is largely a question of taste, and of the preference instinctively shown for the psycho-physical qualities correlated with a particular pigmentation.
        There is certainly little more than fancy in the average English girl's association of fairness with savouriness in the male; 2 but the other correlations already enumerated appear to be generally

        1 P.A.M., pp. 42–43. Commercial travellers might be added, with a high record for infidelity.
        2 See p. 199 supra.

- p. 419 -
valid. Here, as in most other respects, it seems as if it would be better to follow the golden rule and to marry your like, and, as we have seen, most people appear to do this in the matter of pigmentation.
        Proportions. In the previous chapter I discussed the leg-trunk ratio, particularly in the female. I shall now deal more fully with this in the male, and consider other specifically male proportions.
        In judging the proportions of any creature, animal or man, a good rule is to remember function., and thus to avoid the fallacy of criticizing the shire-horse according to race-horse standards, or vice versâ. Nor is unimportant to call attention to this rule, seeing that people as profound and perspicacious as Goethe and Schopenhauer completely forgot it in comparing man and woman, and, as we shall soon discover, a man as experienced and alert as Havelock Ellis has also forgotten it in the same connexion.
        Regarding man from the standpoint of his life-function, then, we must expect his body to differ from woman's, and suspect those men of female elements who show any tendency to approach the specific proportions of woman.
        The typical male, for reasons which I have discussed, has a longer leg than the female. He also does not functionally require a broad pelvis, so that his hips are narrower than woman's. In men and women of the same stature this difference in girth at hips amounts to as much as 6 ins." 1 This relatively narrower pelvis, moreover, makes man's legs much straighter, because, instead of descending from a broad, they descend from a relatively narrow, base. It also leads to much smaller buttocks. Thus a man with heavy buttocks, like one with large breasts, may be suspected of female elements. 2
        Owing to his relatively narrow hips, a man appears to have and should, owing to his larger chest, 3 actually have broader

        1 M.W., p. 56. Also Dr. S. Herbert (op. cit., p. 95) and Dr. A. Forel (op. cit., p. 64).
        2 See P.S.D., p. 95, where feminism of male is described as "large pelvis, prominent hips, breasts of considerable size", and "abundance of sub-cutaneous fat".
        3 F., p. 33: "Man's chest and breadth of shoulders surpass woman's in every dimension except that of depth." Forel (op. cit., p. 64). Also M.W., p. 45. Sir B. C. A. Windle, M.D., in THE PROPORTIONS OF THE HUMAN BODY (London, 1892, p. 62) compares the shoulder-hip ratio in men and women. Taking the relation of the maximum size of hips to that of shoulders as 100:—
                100 male Parisians showed a ratio of 83.0.
                  30 female         "        "        "        "       91.8.
                  30 male Belgians      "        "        "       82.5.
                  30 female         "        "        "        "       94.5.

- p. 420 -
shoulders than a woman, despite his larger head (a feature already discussed), which tends to dwarf his shoulders in a way that a woman's head does not dwarf hers.
        So that the figure of the desirable male might be sketched as follows: Head proportionately larger than woman's, shoulders broader, hips narrower, legs longer and straighter, buttocks smaller and narrower, breasts flatter to the point of consisting only of the pectoral muscles, and back relatively shorter and straighter owing to the diminutive buttocks and longer legs. From the front, too, man's abdominal development looks and actually is inferior to woman's, and the distance from his navel to his pubis is actually shorter. 1
        In one of the oldest attempts at describing an anthropological norm, the ideal man's shoulder-breadth is given as three times the width of his face, and the total height from sole to pubis is 54 angulas — i.e. 54 times one quarter of the width of the palm at the knuckles. 2 I think there is a colourable warrant for assuming that in such a figure the pubis to vertex length would also be 54 angulas, seeing that in another Hindu canon, the UTTAMA-DASA-TALA, the total stature is given as 124 angulas with height to bifurcation as 62 angulas. 3 In another very old Hindu canon, the CITRALAKSHANA, the total leg-length from sole to pubis is given as 58 finger-breadths, which is approximately the same as the former canon. 4
        In two of these canons, precision is carried to the point of giving measurements even for the genital organs in tumescence and detumescence. 5 But we need not carry our investigations so far.
        As we have seen, a very early Hindu canon — older probably than the above — reckoned the total height of a desirable man at 480, with a leg-trunk ratio of 222–258. This meant a very short leg. Schadow thinks this figure that of a well-built man, but himself argues in favour of the height: in the male being

Stratz (D.S.W.K., p. 80) gives the following table after Merkel:—
Normal European: Shoulder breadth:
Hip                "
height, 5 ft. 5 ins.
47 cm (18 1/2 ins.)
32.3 cm. (12.7 ins.)
Normal female: height,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 5 ft. 2 ins.
 37 cm. (14 1/2 ins.)
 34 cm. (13 2/5 ins.)
        1 M.W., p. 43.
        2 PRATIMA-MANA-LAKSANAM (trans. from Sanscrit by Prof. P. N. Bose, Lahore, 1921, pp. 17, 23–24).
        3 Rao (op. cit., I, Part I, p. 9).
        4 DOKUMENTE DER INDISCHEN KUNST (trans. by B. Laufer from the Thibetan, Leipzig, 1913, p. 159).
        5 See, for instance, Bose (op. cit., p. 18), and B. Laufer (op. cit., pp. 157–159).

- p. 421 -
divisible into two equal parts at the pubis, 1 and into two equal parts in the female, provided that, in the latter, the height is measured from the ground only to the pupils of the eyes. 2 Thus, taking the average man's height as 5 ft. 6 ins., and the average woman's at 5 ft. 3 ins., such a man should be 33 ins. above the pubis, and the woman 33 1/2 ins. 3
        Story mentions four Egyptian canons, the last of which (referred to in previous chapter) divides the figure into 19 equal parts — 10 below and 9 above the pubis. 4 I have, however, been able to find no confirmation of this, and the proportions seem to me so wrong for the period, that I wonder whether Story has not stated the figures the wrong way round, in which case the Egyptian canon mentioned by Audran is probably correct, since it gives the total height at 1000, with a leg-trunk ratio of 484–516. 5
        Certainly the trunk-leg ratio in the modern Belgian (496–504) shows how exaggerated the late Greek equivalent (487–513) was, 6 and Quetelet's averages for modern Belgian women bring the monstrous nature of the Greek female trunk-leg ratio, as seen in the previous chapter, still more clearly to light.
        Quetelet found that, with an average height of 1.580 m. (a trifle under 5 ft. 3 ins.) the modern Belgian female measured .781 m. (a trifle under 30 ins.) from sole to pubis, 7 an indication of how closely the continental woman has kept the normal female proportions, despite centuries of Greek influence.
        Thus, according to very old and quite recent documentation, we may assume that a desirable man's height should be divided exactly into half at the pubis, or that the lower half should be, at most, only slightly greater. Any tendency of the lower half in the male to be noticeably shorter than the upper half argues female proportions or premature synostosis of epiphyses. 8
        On the other hand, as Quetelet and others point out, the leg-trunk ratio is very variable, 9 precisely because — a fact he did not know — the closing of the epiphytes of the long bones depends on an endocrine balance which, as we have seen, is an individual

        1 ATLAS TO POLYCLET. Corresponding pp. in book (op. cit., 60–61).
        2 Op. cit., p. 66.
        3 Ibid., pp. 65–66.
        4 Op. cit., p. 15.
        5 A., p. 75.
        6 Ibid., pp. 84–85.
        7 Ibid., p. 204.
        8 Topinard's leg-trunk ratio of 53:47 is obviously only a studio rule, fixed with deliberate falseness because, thanks to traditional Greek influence, it is supposed to impart grace to the figure. (See Windle, op. cit., p. 38.)
        9 A., p. 235. Also A.P.F., pp. 1–2.

- p. 422 -
affair. The length of trunk with head varies much less between individuals, and thus Drs. G. Dreyer and G. F. Hanson used the head and trunk length for determining the remaining proportions and weight of the normal figure.
        Their careful monograph should be studied. It will be possible here to give only a few results covering a range which includes most men of average size. Thus the following correlations were found by them to be usual in the normal male, i.e. not the average male or the majority of males, but in the normal or healthily functioning and vigorous male:—

Head and trunk
in inches.
Weight in stones
lbs. and ozs.
Chest measurement
in inches.
             34 1/2
             35 1/2
             36 1/2
             37 1/2
             38 1/2
             39 1/2
             40 1/2
                              32 3/8
                              32 7/8
                              33 3/8
                              33 7/8
                              34 1/2
                              35 9/16
                              36 1/8
                              36 11/16
                              37 1/4
                              37 13/16
                              38 3/8
                              38 15/16
                              39 1/2 1

        Having tested these correlations, I have found the table (of which the above is only an extract) very helpful and reliable. The authors claim that any correlations below (or in weight above) these figures indicate some abnormality, varying in gravity according to the extent of the variation. And, as the chest capacity indicates vitality, the importance of reaching the right proportions will be appreciated,
        Regarding other proportions. Professor Achille de Giovanni claims the following as desirable:—
        (1) The stature should be equal to the great aperture (i.e. the arms and hands extended and measured from tips of fingers),
        (2) The chest circumference should equal half the stature. (If we follow Drs. Dreyer and Hanson's calculations, and assume

        1 A.P.F., pp. 62–64 and 68–70. Height should be taken sitting, i.e. from top of head to floor, with subject sitting on floor and back to door or wall. Chest circumference should be taken just over nipples, with chest unexpanded, and subject encouraged to talk naturally.

- p. 423 -
that each male is divided into equal halves at the pubis, we shall see that they more or less confirm Giovanni here, or so nearly so that the difference is trifling). 1
        (3) The length of the sternum should equal one-fifth of the chest circumference.
        (4) The length of the abdomen should equal two-fifths of the chest circumference — one-fifth from the base of the xiphoid apophysis to the navel, and one-fifth from the navel to the pubis. 2
        He describes; the ideal male as follows: Stature, 1.72 m. (about 5 ft. 8 3/4 ins.); great aperture, same; chest circumference, 34.4 ins.; sternal length 6 4/5 ins.; abdominal length, 12.8 ins.
        He adds: "The above-mentioned measures appertain to persons endowed with excellent constitutions, healthy and resistent." 3
        Cennini and Riccardi confirm Giovanni as to the ratio of stature to great aperture, 4 and it is curious to see how closely Giovanni's ideal stature approaches to that found in Part II, Chapter I supra, associated with the best life. Regarding the sitting height proportion to chest circumference, Giovanni is silent. If, however, we halve the stature of his ideal man and call the sitting height of his figure 34 3/8 ins., we find his corresponding chest circumference 34.4 ins. instead of the 32.75 ins. given for such a sitting height by Dreyer and Hanson. But since Giovanni does not say whether the chest is expanded or not, and in any case emphasizes the value of a big chest, 5 the difference, about 1 3/5 ins., is not very important.
        On the whole, Dryer and Hanson may be followed with confidence, and their measurements are a useful test of vitality.

        1 Ripley also confirms Giovanni (R.E., p. 382).
        3 Ibid., p. 127. Giovanni regards stature:great-aperture ratio as so important (he claims it is usually normal in upper classes), that he says: "I have found only in a few cases . . . the great aperture inferior to the stature; and in these cases also one had to do with poor persons who suffered from different nervous affections."
        4 LE LIVRE DE L'ART, p. 43 and Giovanni, p. 259.
        5 Ibid., p. 297. My own sitting height, for instance, is 34.75 ins. According to A.P.F., therefore, my chest circumference should be 33.125 ins. But it is actually 33.36 ins., and as I am very thin and something should be added for the more muscular man of my height, it is possible that the A.P.F. correlation is based on a more moderate estimate than Giovanni's. But I should mention that for the last nine years, under F. M. Alexander, I have taken steps to increase my thoracic capacity.

- p. 424 -
A man who fails short in sitting-height-chest ratio should, therefore, be regarded with suspicion, while any excess in weight is also to be apprehended. 1 Enough, however, has already been said on the question of obesity and its dangers, to leave the reader in no doubt whatsoever that this is to be regarded with grave suspicion.
        Regarding the less important proportions, Quetelet says:—
        (1) The width of a man's eye should equal the distance between his eyes, and the length of his nose.
        (2) The length of the ear should equal the width of the two eyes, and should measure half of the distance from the tragus to the top of the head. 2
        (3) From the age of eight, the hand should be to the total stature as 113 is to 1000.
        (4) The foot should be .15 to .16 of the total stature, and the ideal mature man should be six times and two-thirds his own foot in height. 1
        As regards condition 3, Vitruvius differed from Quetelet. He maintained that the hand, which should be as long as the distance between the chin and the roots of the hair, ought to form one-tenth of the stature. 2
        A few Indian proportions might have been of interest, seeing that the European is said to be so closely related to the Hindu; but space forbids. Should the reader be interested, he is advised to refer to the Indian literature mentioned in this and the previous chapter.
        Race. Same as self.
        Religion. Same as self if it is considered important. Otherwise it does not matter.
        Stature. So much has been said about this matter in this and the previous chapters, that there is little to add.
        The first fact to remember is that the medium heights from 5 ft. 3 ins. to 5 ft. 10 ins. are better lives than the heights beyond 5 ft. 10 ins. Possibly Stockard suggests a reason for this when he says: "In general the mass of organs in proportion to body weight was found to be distinctly greater for small than for

        1 For sitting heights other than those given above, the reader should consult A.P.F.
        2 In D.C.S R. (p. 12), Dr. Talbot says of the car: "In the adult it should not average over 2 1/2 ins. in length and 1 1/4 ins. in breadth." He points out (p. 212) how frequently the ears of degenerates attain to extraordinary size.
        3 A., pp. 211–233.
        4 Windle (op. cit., p. 28).

- p. 425 -
longer individuals." 1 For, if the amount of work for a smaller body is less than for a larger body, then the fact that the latter possesses relatively smaller organs with which to perform harder work would seem necessarily to tell against it.
        It may be, too, that there is an optimum stature, to which the average man of each race tends by natural selection to approximate. If this were so, the averages of stature might lend confirmation to the findings of the doctors and the anthropologists.
        According to Ripley the average stature of males in the British Isles is as follows:—

Number of observations. Age. Professional Class. Commercial Class. Industrial
Open Air
66.8" 2

        W. H. L. Duckworth comes very near this when he gives as the average stature for Anglo-American types, 1.705 m. (about 5 ft. 8 ins.), 3 while Wieth-Knudsen also keeps near when he gives the average height of northern Europeans as 5 ft. 7 ins. 4 Dr. , who examined 727 Old Americans of pure British descent, also found the average stature to be 68.63 ins., which is only a little over 5 ft. 8 1/2 ins. 5
        So that the findings appear to revolve so closely round the stature given by Giovanni for his ideal man, and by the insurance doctors for the best life, that we may safely infer that 5 ft. 8 ins. or thereabouts is probably an ideal height for an Englishman. 6
        This does not mean that all taller men are necessarily to be rejected, or are inferior lives. What it probably means is merely that among the mass of men who exceed 5 ft. 10 ins. there are so many who attain this unusual stature without showing the necessary normal chest, weight, and leg correlations, i.e. there are so many who, by being asthenic, narrow-chested or eunuchoid, or all three, are poor specimens of humanity, that their number has seriously reduced the average of viability for their class.

        1 P.B.P., p. 265.
        2 R.E., p. 92.
        3 Studies from the Anthropological Laboratory. The Anatomy School (Cambridge, 1904, p. 253).
        4 F., p. 31.
        5 THE OLD AMERICANS, p. 69.
        6 Among the ancient Jews, "Medium height was the most beautiful", and "there is abundant evidence to show that the average height of the Jew in the days of the Talmud was between 5 ft. 3 ins. and 6 ft." (T.J.C., p. 7).

- p. 426 -
        If, however, a man over 5 ft. 10 ins. can show the requisite normal correlations of weight and chest circumference, and if, moreover, his legs are not abnormally long (suggesting eunuchoidism), he is obviously to be preferred to the shorter man, because size in itself is imposing and involves certain qualities, such as dignity, fine presence, and, as Symonds and Sheldon declare, sociability, leadership, and aggressiveness. 1 Furthermore, seeing that selection appears to favour medium heights, persistent tallness in a family or a stock argues unusual health, hence probably Ripley's remark to the effect that "a tall population implies a relatively healthy one." 2
        It is important, however, to bear in mind that the scrutiny for normal proportions should be even more severe in dealing with the tall than the medium-sized man, particularly if the former happens to be an exception in his stock; because, as we have seen, so many abnormal conditions — eunuchoidism and race-crossing, for instance — may account for the sudden appearance of tallness in a family.
        The next question is, should a girl choose a man much taller than herself?
        The answer undoubtedly is — not necessarily much taller, but certainly taller. This, as we shall see, appears to be the normal relation throughout the world, and it implies everything associated with the correct anatomical relation of the sexes.
        That acute writer, Knight Dunlap, says: "From the point of view of the female, the male must be large, although not a giant," 3 and I think most people will agree with him. In any case it seems to be a natural law that the average female should be slightly smaller than the average male of her own race, and in the previous chapter I have explained why this must be so.
        The only question to decide is — by how much should she normally be smaller?
        A brief examination of the relative heights of man and woman in various races will give us the answer to this question.
         found that in his Old Americans of pure British stock,

        1 See D.P.C., pp. 507 and 509, where Symonds, after examining various statistical inquiries regarding height, says: "We must conclude that height and weight are positively correlated with leadership and the accompanying characteristics of leadership"; and "Sheldon concludes from his experimental survey of the field that the factor of general size, or bigness, seems to be related positively to sociability, leadership and aggressiveness."
        2 R.E., p. 85. See also A.H.E., p. 15.
        3 P.B.R.B., p. 21. Also D.O.M., p. 31.

- p. 427 -
the difference was 12.49 cm., i.e. about 5 ins., the men being 68.63 ins. and the women 63.71 ins. 1
        The same investigator found among the whites in the south-west of the United States and Northern Mexico, the difference was one-sixteenth of the male stature, which is a slightly smaller difference than that given for Old Americans. Vierordt says the difference is 8 to 16 cm., and Topinard says 12 cm. In Italian women with stature 100, their men are 106.5, and in Russian women with stature 100, their men are 108.3. 3
        Wieth-Knudsen makes the difference between the men and women of northern European stock 5 ins., of France, 4.7 ins., and of Belgium, 4.3 ins. 3 Schadow makes it only 2 ins., presumably for Germany. 4 Quetelet found his Belgian women shorter by one-eighteenth of the male's stature. 5
        Turning now to less-civilized races, Dr. Georg Buschan found the women of the Australian aborigines 4 ins. smaller than the men, the latter having an average height of 167.8 cm. (about 5 ft. 7 ins.). 6 Dr. Rodenwaldt found a difference of over 4 ins. between the men and women among his hybrids; 7 W. H. L. Duckworth computes the difference between, the Eskimos of Labrador and their women at a little over 3 ins. (the men are 157 cm. and the women 149 cm.); 8 and, according to Darwin, the difference between male and female Javans is 21.8 cm., or about 9 inches. 9
        Thus, although the difference tends to decline with stature, we find that there are notable exceptions; for the disparity among the Javans is two and a quarter times as great as among the Australians.
        Havelock Ellis confirms the more important findings above, when he states that the difference between English men and women averages about 5 ins. 10
        So we may conclude that, although the difference in stature between the average male and female is not constant throughout the various races of man, it usually declines with average stature, and something between four and five inches is roughly the normal

        1 THE OLD AMERICANS, p. 69.
        2 BUSCHAN ILLUSTRIERTE VÖLKERKUNDE: Physiological and Medical Observations Among the Indians of the S.W. U.S.A. and Northern Mexico, p. 135.
        3 F., p. 31.
        4 POLYCLET, pp. 61–65.
        5 A., pp. 116 and 204.
        6 Op. cit., II, Part I. See, however, D.O.M., p. 559.
        7 A.K., p. 159.
        8 Op. cit., p. 272.
        9 D.O.M., p. 559.
        10 M.W., p. 39.

- p. 428 -
disparity for English people. Anything less than this would be inconsistent with the norm Nature appears to have established as the result of the conditions discussed in the previous chapter, unless very short people are in question, in which case, the difference may normally descend to as low as 2 1/2 ins. 1
        Anything more, particularly if it amounted to many inches more, might be dangerous, because great disparity of this sort, if transmitted to the offspring by the male, may occasion difficulties in childbirth. It is a curious fact, and one that requires some explanation, that whereas in farmers' stock-books and guides to cattle breeding, and in books on dog-breeding, owners of ewes, cows and brood-bitches are warned not to mate their females with males that are disproportionately large, owing precisely to the difficulties such a disparity may lead to in parturition, I have nowhere come across any such warning in expert pronouncements on human mating, except in the RATI SASTRA RATNAVALI, where, addressing young women on the desirable male, the sage says: "If she is of small build, she should avoid marrying one of large build, but accept one who is nearer her own build." 2
        It is true that the child does not necessarily inherit its father stature, and I have known cases where easy births have occurred when the father has been very much taller than the mother. But such good fortune cannot be reckoned upon in the case of every birth.
        The next and last question is whether stature is correlated with fertility in the male. So many popular illusions prevail on this point, and it is so often asserted — probably only in order to bolster up the ever-flagging self-esteem of the short — that small men are unusually potent, that the subject must at least be mentioned.
        According to my own view, there is little in it. The probability is that, since eunuchoidism finds its morphological expression very often in the elongated male, there may have arisen an ignorant belief, based on too sweeping a generalization, that

        1 P.B.R.B., p. 25, Knight Dunlap says: "There is no primary desire of the woman for the man who is able to dominate her physically." I very much doubt the truth of this statement. But, even if it is true in the case of some women. we must reckon with two factors: (a) a relative shortness in females established by natural law, and (b) woman's and man's age-long instinctive adaptation to this disparity.
        2 R.R., p. 68. In A.R. (pp. 52–54) stress is also laid on certain optimum proportions between male and female; but the object seems less to secure easy parturition than to ensure happy sexual relations.

- p. 429 -
tall men are less potent than short men. I do not think, however, that there is any sounder foundation to the alleged correlation than this, and the only statistics I have been able to discover on the subject actually point in the other direction, i.e. to the conclusion that tallness is correlated with greater potency, or at least greater fertility.
        Drs. Aromando, Coio-Pinna and Pintus studied the histories of 433 fathers of the province of Cagliari, and found that those of short stature had much fewer children than those who were tall. 1
        Stock and Family. I have made it abundantly clear that no decision should be arrived at about any man, no matter how attractive, whose family and ultimately whose stock have not been seen. The vagaries of heredity in random-bred stocks are such, and divergences from stock type, whether in size, apparent health, beauty and general build, are so frequently indicative of important constitutional facts, that a scrutiny of close and collateral relations is indispensable. It should, moreover, be the duty of a girl's brothers and elders to gather as much information as possible concerning a potential mate, his antecedents, habits, appearance unclothed, and his unguarded expressions of opinion and tastes. These precautions will usually be found adequately to take the place of any medical examination, however trustworthy, and are usually much simpler.
        Temperament. Most of the essentials have been dealt with under Erotic Disposition, and if the female reader follows the rule of selecting the positive male, she cannot go very far wrong; for such a man will have the warm temperament that makes for happiness. It is important to look out for possible sublimations of sexual passion. Among these, I believe, are athleticism and particularly constant and arduous horse-riding. In two people as widely separated as the ancient Scythians of northern Asia, and the modern descendants of the Aztecs of Mexico, male potency is said to have been impaired by excessive horse-riding, and this coincidence is important. Hippocrates tells us that among the causes of "barrenness in the man", is "the constant jolting of their horses" — "for wherever men ride very much and very frequently, there the majority . . . are sexually very weak. These complaints came upon the Scythians, and they are the most impotent of men, for the reasons I have given." 2 Hippocrates

        1 J.A.M.A., 28.10.33, p. 1405.
        2 Op. cit., XXI, XXII. These impotent men were called "Anaries".

- p. 430 -
proceeds to give reasons for the impotence of excessive horse-riders which are unscientific; but his observation is interesting, seeing that it is independently confirmed by a practice adopted by the descendants of the Aztecs for the cultivation of eunuchs. Dr. W. A. Hammond, of the U.S. Army, who saw some of these Mexican eunuchs, or "Mujerados," vouches for the fact that all the characteristics of the eunuch were present in them, and that constant horse-riding is one of the two means used in producing them. Apparently they are deliberately reared for religious ceremonies "in which pederasty plays an important part." 1
        These two independent pieces of evidence both converging upon the importance of the factor "excessive horse-riding" in the production of eunuchoidism, are surely very significant; for it should always be remembered that, where acute symptoms or consequences are known to arise from the excessive practice of a certain habit, minor or chronic symptoms may arise from a practice which is just short of being excessive.
        Voice. Men with bass, baritone or tenor voices are all desirable. The men to avoid are:—
        Those with falsetto voices. Those with weak or woolly voices. Those with voices which, no matter of what kind, have no ring in them.
        The associated feature of a larger larynx in the male, should also not be overlooked. For although an "Adam's apple" need not be prominent it should be discernable. 2

*        *        *        *        *        *        *

        The above does not pretend to be an exhaustive enumeration of the desirable male mate's "points." Taken in conjunction with the information to b's found in the previous chapters, however, it covers most of the relevant characters. To have attempted a more rigid statement of the desirable features might have been to please the indolent and less thoughtful female reader; but to her who is not shy of study and who would resent not being allowed to use her judgment in drawing inferences from the mass of data given, it would have been to offer an inelastic and unreal canon for which she could have little use.

        1 THE AMER. JOURN. OF DERMATOLOGY AND GENITO-URINARY DISEASES, Sept., 1912, XVI, No. 9 (Article: A Study of Eunuchoidism in its various aspects and its bearing on other Pathological States, by Dr. B. Onuf, p. 471).
        2 Maranon (op. cit. p. 58), also T.O.S. p. 36.



Next Chapter